How many times have you gone to use your TV remote only to find that its batteries are dead?
Another dead battery is useless, right? Well, not to researchers at MIT, which have found another way to use these lifeless objects: recycling their main ingredient — lead — to create solar cells.
Lead is a toxic substance that not only causes a multitude of medical problems but is also linked to spikes in violent crime. That’s why many governments have outlawed it from being used in paint and gasoline, as well as requiring battery manufacturers to recycle their product.
However, while the recycling process was working, there’s a slight hitch now. With the introduction of non-lead batteries, such as lithium-ion ones, there isn’t going to be as much of a need to recycle the old lead-filled ones, according to Fast Company.
So what’s going to happen to all that lead?
Fortunately, MIT researchers discovered the ability to use lead to produce solar cells from a material called perovskite, a mineral that’s incredibly energy efficient. Not only is it cheaper than the silicon used in today’s cells, but it also converts solar energy to electricity at a little less than 20 percent. To top it off, the mineral is highly flexible — meaning that the cells it makes are 100 times thinner than human hairs and can bend easily, reports Fast Company.
Normally, acquiring the lead would be a problem, but with all of these excess batteries, researchers have found their supply. From each battery, about 30 solar cells could be made.
Unfortunately, there aren’t any plans to commercialize this product. MIT researchers are leaving that to other companies, such as the U.K.’s Oxford PV, while they work on a lead-free perovskite solar cell.
But for the time being, those old batteries are being put to good use and given a second life.
Who would’ve thought something so toxic could be so energy efficient?
[ph]
MORE: Millions of Tiny Hairs Might Replace Your Windshield Wipers
Tag: batteries
Inside the Race to Build an Affordable Electric Vehicle
One of the main reasons why electric vehicles (EV) haven’t quite caught on in this country? Their cost. But back in July, Tesla Motors CEO Elon Musk announced news that lots of people were waiting to hear — that his car company is working on the first EV for the mainstream.
Called the Model 3, Musk claims that the car (targeted for release in 2016 and available to the general public in 2017) will cost $35,000 and can travel 200 miles on a single charge. The only other major EV that can reach 200-something miles is the Tesla Model S, which starts at a much more costly $70,000.
If the Model 3 succeeds, Tesla could dominate a very niche and profitable sector. But not if General Motors gets there first.
MORE: Tesla’s Brilliant — and Generous — Move to Help Save the Planet
Quartz recently detailed the tense and exciting battle between the two auto companies vying to make the first mass-market electric car. Here, some of the most interesting findings:
1. Tesla or GM could sell a LOT of electric cars. Like the highly popular and desirable BMW 3 series, there is a serious market for entry-level luxury cars. And now that consumers are more open to plug-ins, plus the trendiness of sustainable products, the sky’s the limit. Experts tell Quartz that the potential of an affordable 200-mile EV could really sway buyers to make the switch to electric, since that’s the point at which people no longer feel scared about their battery running out of juice in the middle of nowhere. Sales of electric cars — which currently stand at 2,000 to 3,000 vehicles a month — could swell to 15 to 20 times that amount once this technology proves successful, Quartz reports.
2. Tesla’s “gigafactory.” The reason why EVs are currently so expensive: batteries are costly. However, as technology improves, batteries will get cheaper. For example, the Tesla Model S lithium-ion battery currently costs about $15,000 per car, but Musk is building an enormous plant called the “gigafactory” that aims to double the global production of batteries — thus cutting expenses. Musk expects his new batteries will cost about $10,500 each.
3. GM is worried. Can a 106-year-old car company (riddled with controversy and recalls) actually compete against the technological whizzbangery of 10-year-old Tesla and its charismatic rockstar of a CEO? Steve Girsky, GM’s vice chairman, says that former GM CEO Dan Akerson was worried about Tesla and assigned a small team to study Musk’s EV’s and how it might threaten GM’s business.
4. GM, however, has a card up its sleeve. Tesla isn’t the only one working on a cheaper super battery. According to Quartz, Korean chemical company LG Chemical is working on their own battery that could be 200-mile ready by 2016. And while LG hasn’t said which automaker is getting the battery, since LG is GM’s supplier, we have a good guess as to which company will get it.
5. Still, the smart money is on Tesla. “We just haven’t seen any incumbent carmaker that has been able to make a compelling plug-in car in the way that Tesla has,” Navigant’s Sam Jaffe tells Quartz.
The drama between Tesla and GM is already exciting, but the best part about this EV battle? The planet is much better off for it. With so many environmentally friendly cars potentially flooding our roads, this would reduce the demand on fossil fuels and maybe, one day, even put a serious dent in the earth-damaging oil industry.
Competition spurs the best in innovation and as Tesla spokesperson Simon Sproule said after Musk surprisingly released his electric car patents to all in June, “The mission of the company is to accelerate the widespread adoption of electric cars. If Tesla acts as the catalyst for other manufacturers … that will have been achieved.”
Guess we only have to wait two years to find out which company comes out on top.
DON’T MISS: Instead of Letting Veterans Struggle Post Service, GM Trains Them for Dealership Employment
What Is the Battery of the Future Made Of?
From powering pacemakers to kids’ toys and everything in between, we rely on batteries every day.
But with lithium — the material we use to make batteries — becoming a less viable resource, how are we going to power our gadgets?
Turns out, there’s an alternative energy source that grows quite abundantly: Algae.
Sounds like a crazy idea, right?
Not to Adam Freeman and his team at alGAS in California.
Algae, which forms in large blooms on the water’s surface, can be harmful to fish living below, but it has huge potential in the battery-powered world. The prototype creator says that his algae battery is powerful enough to run anything — even a Tesla!
Not only would an algae battery be incredibly versatile, but it could also charge in a fraction of the time that current, lithium batteries do. Turns out, the incredibly thin fibers found in algae are much more conducive for ions to flow through, making charge time as quick as eleven seconds, according to Tech Crunch.
While this innovation is certainly eco-friendly and time efficient, it is also cost efficient: the lithium imported for batteries not just nonrenewable, but it has to be shipped from China — making batteries more costly.
Although still in testing phases, Freeman says he would be able to make a functioning battery prototype with $1,500 more in funding; $5,000 more and an algae-powered battery it could be ready for mass production.
Between Freeman’s work and this experiment that transformed algae into crude oil, this water plant is on track to become a significant part of America’s renewable energy landscape.
DON’T MISS: The Top 5 Ways to Fight Global Warming